Comparative Evaluation of the Diagnostic Value of Procalcitonin and hsCRP for the Presence of Mild-to-Moderate Diabetic Foot Infections

被引:7
作者
Todorova, Ani S. [1 ]
Dimova, Rumyana B. [1 ]
Chakarova, Nevena Y. [1 ]
Serdarova, Mina S. [1 ]
Grozeva, Greta G. [1 ]
Georgiev, Georgi K. [1 ]
Tankova, Tsvetalina I. [1 ]
机构
[1] Med Univ Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
关键词
diabetic foot; diabetic foot infection; hsCRP; procalcitonin; SERUM PROCALCITONIN; ULCERS; LEVEL;
D O I
10.1177/15347346211011849
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of procalcitonin (PCT) and high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP) as diagnostic biomarkers in patients with diabetes and mild-to-moderate diabetic foot infections. A total of 119 patients (102 with type 2 diabetes and 17 with type 1 diabetes), of mean age 60.29 +/- 10.05 years, divided into 3 groups-diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) with active infection (IDFU group, n = 41), DFU without clinical signs of infection (non-IDFU group, n = 35), and a control group with diabetes without DFU (n = 43). Infection severity was graded according to the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot guideline-non-IDFU group as Grade 1, IDFU group as Grade 2 (n = 22), and Grade 3 (n = 19). Serum hsCRP was assessed by the immunoturbidimetric method and PCT by the enzyme chemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) method. Levels of white blood cells (WBC) were assessed using the Medonic hematology analyzer and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) by the Westergren method. Serum hsCRP, WBC count, and ESR were significantly higher in the IDFU group as compared to non-IDFU and control groups, whereas PCT levels did not differ between the groups. hsCRP presented with higher sensitivity (80%), specificity (79%), area under the curve (AUC) 0.856, in comparison to PCT (sensitivity 63%, specificity 62%, AUC 0.617) for the presence of IDFU, as well as in the Grade 3 subgroup (84% sensitivity and specificity, AUC 0.911). The combined model of both markers did not present with better accuracy than using hsCRP alone. In conclusion, hsCRP appears to be a better diagnostic biomarker than PCT in the diagnosis of moderate foot ulcer infection. Both markers fail to distinguish mild infection.
引用
收藏
页码:353 / 359
页数:7
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [11] The Value of Serum Procalcitonin Level for Differentiation of Infectious from Noninfectious Causes of Fever After Orthopedic Surgery
    Hunziker, Sabina
    Huegle, Thomas
    Schuchardt, Katrin
    Groeschl, Isabelle
    Schuetz, Philipp
    Mueller, Beat
    Dick, Walter
    Eriksson, Urs
    Trampuz, Andrej
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2010, 92A (01) : 138 - 148
  • [12] Levels of wound calprotectin and other inflammatory biomarkers aid in deciding which patients with a diabetic foot ulcer need antibiotic therapy (INDUCE study)
    Ingram, J. R.
    Cawley, S.
    Coulman, E.
    Gregory, C.
    Thomas-Jones, E.
    Pickles, T.
    Cannings-John, R.
    Francis, N. A.
    Harding, K.
    Hood, K.
    Piguet, V.
    [J]. DIABETIC MEDICINE, 2018, 35 (02) : 255 - 261
  • [13] Can Procalcitonin Be an Accurate Diagnostic Marker for the Classification of Diabetic Foot Ulcers?
    Jafari, Nematollah Jonaidi
    Firouzabadi, Mahdi Safaee
    Izadi, Morteza
    Firouzabadi, Mohammad Sadegh Safaee
    Saburi, Amin
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGY AND METABOLISM, 2014, 12 (01)
  • [14] Serum procalcitonin and C-reactive protein concentrations to distinguish mildly infected from non-infected diabetic foot ulcers: a pilot study
    Jeandrot, A.
    Richard, J. -L.
    Combescure, C.
    Jourdan, N.
    Finge, S.
    Rodier, M.
    Corbeau, P.
    Sotto, A.
    Lavigne, J. -P.
    [J]. DIABETOLOGIA, 2008, 51 (02) : 347 - 352
  • [15] The Role of Serum Procalcitonin, Interleukin-6, and Fibrinogen Levels in Differential Diagnosis of Diabetic Foot Ulcer Infection
    Korkmaz, Pinar
    Kocak, Havva
    Onbasi, Kevser
    Bicici, Polat
    Ozmen, Ahmet
    Uyar, Cemile
    Ozatag, Duru Mistanoglu
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DIABETES RESEARCH, 2018, 2018
  • [16] Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)
    Lipsky, Benjamin A.
    Senneville, Eric
    Abbas, Zulfiqarali G.
    Aragon-Sanchez, Javier
    Diggle, Mathew
    Embil, John M.
    Kono, Shigeo
    Lavery, Lawrence A.
    Malone, Matthew
    van Asten, Suzanne A.
    Urbancic-Rovan, Vilma
    Peters, Edgar J. G.
    [J]. DIABETES-METABOLISM RESEARCH AND REVIEWS, 2020, 36
  • [17] The role of procalcitonin as a marker of diabetic foot ulcer infection
    Massara, Mafalda
    De Caridi, Giovanni
    Serra, Raffaele
    Barilla, David
    Cutrupi, Andrea
    Volpe, Alberto
    Cutrupi, Francesco
    Alberti, Antonino
    Volpe, Pietro
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL WOUND JOURNAL, 2017, 14 (01) : 31 - 34
  • [18] Mehanic Snjezana, 2013, Mater Sociomed, V25, P277, DOI 10.5455/msm.2013.25.277-281
  • [19] Guidelines on the classification of diabetic foot ulcers (IWGDF 2019)
    Monteiro-Soares, Matilde
    Russell, David
    Boyko, Edward J.
    Jeffcoate, William
    Mills, Joseph L.
    Morbach, Stephan
    Game, Fran
    [J]. DIABETES-METABOLISM RESEARCH AND REVIEWS, 2020, 36
  • [20] Can procalcitonin predict bone infection in people with diabetes with infected foot ulcers? A pilot study
    Mutluoglu, Mesut
    Uzun, Gunalp
    Ipcioglu, Osman M.
    Sildiroglu, Onur
    Ozcan, Omer
    Turhan, Vedat
    Mutlu, Hakan
    Yildiz, Senol
    [J]. DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2011, 94 (01) : 53 - 56